Procedure for Assessing Teaching Competency of Art University Students

Focus on teaching competencies that need to be formed and developed according to the objectives of the subject/semester/output standards of the University of Art Education. Use a variety of different tools (written tests, in-class questions, study sheets, homework...).

+ Information analysis and processing: qualitative information on teaching attitudes and abilities obtained through observation, oral responses, demonstrations, etc. are analyzed at many levels with clear criteria and stored in the daily logbook; quantitative information through tests is scored according to the answers/scoring instructions, is accurate and meets the technical requirements of teaching abilities, number of tests, average score statistics, academic ranking, etc. according to the assessment and classification regulations.

+ Confirm learning outcomes (teaching competence): confirm whether the learner has achieved or not achieved the objectives of each teaching competence. At the end of the course and semester, based on quantitative and qualitative results, analyze and explain learning progress based on both process assessment results and final assessment results, and based on students' learning attitudes and capacity development. Make timely decisions to improve lecturers' teaching activities and students' learning activities; make decisions on students' learning outcomes, notify students and related departments, faculties and divisions.

Confirmation of learning outcomes is usually conducted in 3 steps:

Step 1 : Guide students to self-assess and evaluate their performance

Announce assessment criteria to students before the lesson; Collect products and results of developing students' teaching capacity; Distribute test sheets and self-test instructions, provide testing tools; Organize students to self-test and test each other; Require students to report the results of teaching capacity tests; Comment on and disseminate learning experiences and initiatives.

Step 2 : Notification of assessment conclusion, login assessment information

Communicating assessment results to students through assessment forms provides feedback to help them self-correct their performance, and enables them to confirm what is acceptable as a process or product. In other words, students can participate in the assessment process - self-assess their learning outcomes.

Step 3 : Manage assessment records

Assessment records include: tests, observation logs, notes, tools, evidence and confirmation of students' teaching ability. Assessment records are managed by lecturers by course or student code and are provided to students, relevant departments and kept in student records.

Figure 3.3. Process of assessing teaching capacity of students of the University of Art Education

Source

information

Observe practice hours, take tests, produce

NLDH practice products.

Select content

Evaluate

Basically, the focus according to the NLDH needs to be formed.

Form and develop according to the objectives of the subject/semester/output standards of the University of Art Education

Analysis and processing

information

Select assessment tool

Information Collection

Qualitative information

Quantitative information

Written tests, classroom questions, study sheets, homework... about NLDH.

Through observation, oral responses, demonstrations... analyzed at many levels with clear criteria, stored in the daily logbook.

Through the test, the technical requirements of NLDH are met according to the evaluation and classification regulations.

Confirm results

Guide students to self-assess and evaluate

NLDH price

Announce assessment criteria for students before the lesson Collect products and results of students' learning development

Distribute test papers and tools, guide self-testing Organize students to self-test and test each other

Require students to report their NLDH test results Comments, disseminate learning experiences and initiatives

learning (teaching ability)

Notification

Conclusion, login review information

Manage assessment records

SV adjusts performance, confirms what is acceptable for the process or product.

Including: test questions, observation logs, recording documents, tools, evidence and confirmation of students' learning ability.

Manage by course, by student code; Provide to students, related departments and save student records.

3.3. Testing the necessity and feasibility of the measures proposed in the thesis

3.3.1. Introduction to testing organization

3.3.1.1. Purpose of testing

Recognize the assessment opinions on the necessity and feasibility of the 7 measures proposed in the thesis.

3.3.1.2. Test content

Evaluate the necessity and feasibility of 7 measures to develop teaching capacity for students of Art Education University based on experiential education proposed by the author.

3.3.1.3. Testing method

The author used the Questionnaire (Appendix 7) to survey the opinions of training managers, professional lecturers of a number of higher education institutions training in the majors of Music Education, Fine Arts Education and teachers of Music and Fine Arts in high schools. The assessment levels are as follows (From level 1 to level 5).

- Level 1: Not necessary/ Not feasible

- Level 2: Less necessary/ Less feasible

- Level 3: Relatively necessary/ Relatively feasible

- Level 4: Necessary/ Feasible

- Level 5: Very necessary/Very feasible

3.3.1.4. Test subjects

Processing the test results, after collecting the Questionnaires, the author filters the valid Questionnaires, processes them according to the percentage and the results are shown in Table 3.2 and Table 3.3.

3.3.2. Test results

3.3.2.1. Test results on the necessity of solutions

Table 3.2. Summary of opinions on the necessity of measures

Review content		Rating %
		Level 1	Level 2	Level 3	Level 4	Level 5
1	Measure 1: Design a teaching competency framework
	Study to meet the training needs of the University of Art Education		0.0	0.0	4.8	11.8	83.5
2	Measure 2: Build a practical process
	current study to develop teaching capacity for students		0.0	0.0	4.0	11.5	84.5
3	Measure 3 : Build and use the system		0.0	0.0	2.0	10.3	87.7
	professional practice system	practice in teaching subject
4	Measure 4 : Organize teaching in the direction
	experiential education to develop students' teaching capacity		0.0	0.0	0.0	11.3	88.7
5	Measure 5 : Organize practical lessons
	Pedagogical practice towards vocational capacity development		0.0	0.0	0.0	8.5	91.5

Maybe you are interested!

Measure 6: Innovation in internship activities,		0.0	0.0	0.0	13.5	86.5
intern teach for	crime to develop capacity student
7	Measure 7: Evaluate development results
	Teaching students' learning capacity according to the process and guiding students' self-assessment		0.0	0.0	1.8	13.3	85.0
General ratio:			0.0	0.0	1.8	11.5	86.8

The survey results show that the majority of opinions choose the necessity of the solutions at level 5 - Very necessary (86.8%), level 4 - Necessary (11.5%); very few opinions choose at level 3 - Relatively necessary (1.8%); no opinions choose at level 2 - Less necessary and 1 - Not necessary. Of which, the highest concentration of choices (91.5) is at level 5 - Very necessary under measure 5: Organizing pedagogical practice hours according to the orientation of forming professional capacity (Table 3.2).

3.3.2.2. Test results on the feasibility of solutions

Table 3.3. Summary of opinions on the feasibility of measures

Review content

Rating %

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5

Measure 1: Design a teaching competency framework

Study to meet the training needs of the University of Art Education

0.0

2.8

12.8

84.5

Measure 2: Develop a process for implementing lessons to develop teaching capacity

study for students

0.0

2.3

12.0

85.7

Measure 3 : Build and use a system of practical exercises in teaching.

professional subject

0.0

1.8

9.8

88.5

Measure 4 : Organize teaching in the direction

experiential education to develop students' teaching capacity

0.0

12.3

87.7

Measure 5 : Organize practical lessons

Pedagogical practice towards vocational capacity development

0.0

7.0

93.0

Measure 6: Innovation in internship activities,

Teaching internship to develop teaching capacity for students

0.0

10.5

89.5

Measure 7: Evaluate the results of developing students' teaching capacity according to the process.

present and guide students to self-assessment

0.0

2.3

11.3

86.5

General ratio:

0.0

1.3

10.8

87.9

Testing the feasibility of the solutions proposed in the thesis, the comments are relatively focused.

Thus, the results of the expert consultation mostly showed that the proposed solutions are suitable for practice, urgent and feasible. However, the experts said that to implement well, there must be a high level of consensus and determination from the Board of Directors, managers, lecturers and students to have synchronization in performing the tasks.

3.4. Pedagogical experiment

3.4.1. Overview of the experimental process

3.4.1.1. Experimental purpose

We conducted a pedagogical experiment to realize the implementation of the above measures to develop teaching capacity for students of the University of Art Education based on experiential education, on that basis, evaluate the practical effectiveness of the measures and re-verify the scientific hypothesis that we have raised.

3.4.1.2. Experimental subjects

The experiment was conducted on 56 students of the University of Music Education and the University of Fine Arts Education, Faculty of Art Education, Thanh Hoa University of Culture, Sports and Tourism.

3.4.1.3. Experimental content

We conducted experiments on 3/7 measures to develop teaching capacity for students of the University of Art Education based on experiential education that the thesis proposed on the experimental group in the Teaching Theory course. The experimental measures include:

- Measure 2: Develop a process for implementing lessons to develop students' teaching capacity.

- Measure 3: Build and use a system of practical exercises in teaching professional subjects.

- Measure 4: Organize teaching and learning in the direction of experiential education to develop students' teaching capacity.

The organization and implementation of measures to develop teaching capacity for students of the University of Arts Education in the process of teaching the subject of Teaching Theory for students was carried out simultaneously in both control and experimental classes. We taught 10 periods of Teaching Theory for both classes, with the same test and evaluation instructions in terms of form and time. In which, the control group taught according to the normal lesson plan, the experimental group taught according to the experimental lesson plan.

In addition to experimental teaching, we also use observation, interview, statistics on the results of pedagogical practice, and consultation on the level of achievement of teaching competencies in the experimental group and the control group. From there, we have measures to control and adjust the experimental process in a timely manner.

To make the experiment process go smoothly, we have carefully prepared the textbooks for lecturers and learning materials for students, printed practice exercises for students, projectors for electronic lesson plans. The experimental classes are fully equipped with facilities, teaching equipment, etc.

3.4.1.4. Select experimental samples

To facilitate research, monitoring and evaluation, we chose Thanh Hoa University of Culture, Sports and Tourism as the experimental site. The school's leadership agreed to apply a pilot measure to develop teaching capacity for students of the University of Art Education.

Based on the list of students of Music Education University and Fine Arts Education University K4, arranged in alphabetical order A, B, C..., we randomly selected students with even numbers as the experimental group, and students with odd numbers as the control group.

Before conducting the experiment, we conducted an entrance test of the students. After teaching 5 periods, we conducted an evaluation test of both classes.

1. After 10 periods, we conducted the second assessment test. The test aimed to evaluate the learning outcomes of the Teaching Theory course of the experimental classes in all aspects of knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Between the first and second tests, we learned from experience, adjusted, and supplemented the teaching process and made the second test more reasonable and effective.

3.4.1.5. Experimental process

Pedagogical experiment is carried out according to the following steps:

* Step 1: Prepare the conditions for conducting the experiment

- Research the subjects and select the control class and experimental class.

- Training of collaborators

- Prepare material conditions to conduct pedagogical experiments

- Develop criteria and evaluation scales…

* Step 2: Experimental implementation

- Input test of experimental and control classes

- Conduct pedagogical experiments with established measures

* Step 3: Measure and analyze experimental results

- Processing results of pedagogical experiments

- Analysis of pedagogical experiment results

- Evaluation of pedagogical experiment results.

After organizing training and impacting the experimental group students, we compared the experimental group with the control group on the following criteria:

- Learning outcomes of the teaching theory course of the experimental and control groups.

- Results of pedagogical practice of students in two experimental and control groups.

- The existing teaching capacity system of students and the achieved capacity level in the experimental group and the control group.

3.4.1.6. Criteria and assessment scale

Evaluation criteria

The basis for evaluating experimental results includes 3 criteria:

1. Learning outcomes of the Teaching Theory course and Pedagogical Practice score;

2. The results of developing students' teaching capacity are determined through the level of students' teaching capacity and the results of observing their teaching capacity when practicing teaching in the sections of Pedagogical Practice and Pedagogical Internship.

3. Students' positivity and interest in learning during the process of developing teaching capacity are determined through: Survey results using questionnaires, direct observation results of the training process to develop teaching capacity.

Rating scale

To evaluate the experimental results, we use a rating scale.

10. Corresponding to the assessment scale are 5 levels: 9 to 10 points is excellent, 7 to 8 points is good, 5 to 6 points is average, 3 to 4 points is weak, below 3 is poor. This score evaluates the student's learning results with the subject Teaching Theory in terms of knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

To evaluate the level of change of learners after completing a unit of Teaching Theory knowledge using measures to develop teaching capacity, we rely on the Bloom's classification of cognitive levels with the following levels: Level 1: Remember, Level 2: Understand, Level 3: Apply, Level 4: Analyze, Level 5: Synthesize, Level 6: Evaluate. In which Levels 4, 5, 6 correspond to the excellent level (9 - 10 points), Levels 3, 4, 5 correspond to the good level (7 - 8 points), Levels 2, 3 correspond to the average level (5 - 6 points), Level 1 corresponds to the weak level (3 - 5 points), below Level 1 corresponds to the poor level (< 3 points)

Based on the assessment criteria, we developed three tests to evaluate the learning outcomes of students in the experimental and control classes: an input test before the experiment, a regular test after 5 periods (first experimental results assessment), and an output test after 10 periods (second experimental results assessment).

Experimental results are processed by mathematical statistics method: Create frequency distribution table, frequency of students achieving scores; Illustrate research results with graphs; Calculate characteristic parameters and test average values.

3.4.2. Analysis of experimental results

3.4.2.1. Initial level results of students before the experiment

We conducted a survey and tested the cognitive and skills aspects in the Teaching Theory course of the experimental class and the control class through a theory test.

1-period theory with one theory test and one practice test (Appendix 5). Experimental results are shown in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4. Initial proficiency test results

about the subject of Teaching Theory of the control class and experimental class

Class

Level

Experimental class (TN)		Control class
Quantity	Ratio %	Quantity	Ratio %
Good	0	0	0	0
Rather	8	28.6	6	21.4
Medium	16	57.1	17	60.7
Weak	4	14.3	5	17.9
Least	0	0	0	0

Figure 3.4. Graph of input perception results of control class and experimental class

Experimental class

Excellent Fair Average Poor

- To test the good rate in the control group and the experimental group, we base on the hypothesis testing method between the two rates:

We call the good rate in the control class f 1; The good rate in the experimental class f 2; We set up the statistical hypothesis:

H 1 : f 1 = f 2 (the rate of good cognitive type in the two control and experimental classes before the experiment is the same).

H 2 : f 1 ≠ f 2 (the proportion of good cognitive types in the control and experimental classes before the experiment is different).

Applying the test in the normal distribution, we have the test quantity on the 2 given samples as:

| m 1- m 2 |

D =n 1 n 2=

|-|

28 28

= 0.63

√ m 1+ m 2. ( 1- m 1+ m 2 ) . ( 1+ 1)

√ 8+6 . ( 1-) . ( 1

+ 1 )

n 1 + n 2

n 1 n 256

56 28 28

In which: m1 is the number of elements achieving good cognitive level in the experimental class m2 is the number of elements achieving good cognitive level in the control class

n 1 is the number of elements in the experimental class n 2 is the number of elements in the control class